If it was done well, and done right, I can't see an issue with every class having the ability to tank, heal or dps within their tree's.

What would be the point of being any class at that point? Giving everyone access to everything simply creates homogenization and causes a major blur between the class distinction. I would seriously quit wow if something happened like this - and I've been playing since day 1. Classes need flavor, distinction, and a feeling of uniqueness.

I can tank and you can't... You can heal and I can't... We need each other to work together. Hey look over there, that guy can really blast the crap out of people... but he's pretty useless for anything else... let's bring him into the fold...

This may very well be just me personally, but I think a lot of people feel similarly. I do not like homogenization. I like each class to have their place, to have their roles, and to in some regards - be their own special little flowers.

Honestly... I wear dockers because they make the type of pants that I like. Sure, dickies makes them, and a few others... but I don't have to worry about looking at levi's or wranglers - because they're not the type of pants I want. Seriously... If everyone started making every variety of pants, I'd probably give up on the system and just stop wearing them. That's what homogenization means to me.

I honestly never understood people's desires to essentially add in an additional role to what the lore / concept is.

This really goes back to my belief that Paladins should have never been healers to begin with. Bear with my for a second, and you'll hopefully understand what I mean... Historically, Paladins have been Holy warriors who can also provide minor emergency healing. They have never been a 'dedicated healer'. World of Warcraft, for whatever reason has decided to redefine paladins and add them in as a 'dedicated healer'. This of course frustrates me to no end. These are the epitome of avenging warriors, on a holy crusade to bash evils head in and hold the line to protect those who are not righteously empowered. They have been reduced to healers...

Now, let's consider what death knights are supposed to be... Essentially Corrupted, fallen paladins controlled and empowered with demonic shadow powers. So... You want to take something that is essentially a shadow paladin of doom, and remove the 'I am a bad-arse death knight who will bash your head in' aspect. I don't want my Death knights to become something they're not just because it helps fill an extra role. We are not healers, and we should not be.

That's just my opinion, take it how you like.

While i agree with this, and even if never before paladins were considered dedicated healer, it still does not change the fact that you can, basically, do whatrver the hell you want with your game/class, and hence having paladins as healer.

As far as i'm concerned it's always about gameplay/game mechanics, in the end, even if i like lore, i'm not gonna bother too much about ideas about how class should/are supposed to be.

"Skill, as the world of warcraft goes, is only in question between equals in pvp power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must."

I still chuckle every time I look at the helpful void zone business. How many years have we had it drilled into us as raiders that standing in the *stuff on floor* is BAD, then every now and then Blizz throw us a curveball and lay down some buff *stuff on floor*.

I love the idea personally but on closer inspection I can see there being a serious issue with players being able to determine what's benificial to them and what isn't, quickly enough to make it useful, in a hectic raid environment.

I still chuckle every time I look at the helpful void zone business. How many years have we had it drilled into us as raiders that standing in the *stuff on floor* is BAD, then every now and then Blizz throw us a curveball and lay down some buff *stuff on floor*.

I love the idea personally but on closer inspection I can see there being a serious issue with players being able to determine what's benificial to them and what isn't, quickly enough to make it useful, in a hectic raid environment.

"Dave, Dave... GET IN THE DEFILE... NO, THIS ONE, THE HELPFUL ONE... NOOOOOOOOOOOO"

If they did a DK heal spec then I would like to see alot of that healing coming from nerfed damage spells that now provide healing as compensation. Maybe have it be an antithesis of Pallies but rather than Beaconing a target we can turn allies into Undead temporarily letting us heal them or give them beneficial effects.

So infecting a target with Blood Plague for instance would put a HoT on anyone in the raid who's Undead and Icy Touch could create an Icy Barrier round your allies. DnD could instantly turn anyone who stands on it an Undead giving you the basis for AoE healing and Death Coil could become an actual cast and receive a bump in healing power.

Maybe DRW could be a passive that lets you use melee spells at range so your not tied into being melee but the biggest hurdle is how to balance the numbers and giving you some way to heal when you can't damage a target.

All the healers in the game are your bog-standard archetypical healer classes (as in; holy, nature or zen mysticism boringness) with happy, bright my little pony particle effects. I would love a 'darker' healing class/spec. There is already a good amount of healing going on in the class as self-healing. Take Death Siphon, blood worms, blood strike, rune tap, Lichborne + death coil and sacrificial pet.

One idea would be to make it a second HoT class where the diseases are replaced by HoTs and a version of Pestilence to spread HoTs or secondary effects. Another would be to make the spec more ground targetting-based. This would require more awareness from other players instead of just relying purely on the healer to do their job. And we *know* dark energy can heal, as seen with many mobs/bosses who cast stuff like 'Dark Mending'.

As for the people who are lore buffs; just because it's not in the lore doesn't mean it can't exist. I continually see this coming up in lore arguments. Lack of evidence proves nada. Now, if it were directly denied in the lore, I'll be the first to take your side on this. But I think it fits rather well to have a healer sub-class amongst the Death Knight ranks. The word 'death' in the class name isn't there because they are purely offensive in nature. It's there because they are undead and have power over the dead. Their control over life/souls (reanimation), death and blood actually make more sense to me than unexplained holy power or the oh-so boring mystical powers of Zen.

I'm not saying it should be a straight up direct healing class. It would be far more fun if a DK healing spec would rely more on manipulation of mechanics instead of directly targeted spells (which I find extremely boring and uninspired btw). It would create a helluva lot more synergy between dps/tanks and healers then there is now.

For me, the concept of a death can heal isn't far fetched at all and it actually makes a lot of sense from a Lore standpoint. Sacrificing your own life force and using minions to heals others is just a cool idea. I have't healed since wrath, but this is something that would make me heal again.

I included a video in the OP to explain a little more about the concept.

I honestly never understood people's desires to essentially add in an additional role to what the lore / concept is.

This really goes back to my belief that Paladins should have never been healers to begin with. Bear with my for a second, and you'll hopefully understand what I mean... Historically, Paladins have been Holy warriors who can also provide minor emergency healing. They have never been a 'dedicated healer'. World of Warcraft, for whatever reason has decided to redefine paladins and add them in as a 'dedicated healer'. This of course frustrates me to no end. These are the epitome of avenging warriors, on a holy crusade to bash evils head in and hold the line to protect those who are not righteously empowered. They have been reduced to healers...

Now, let's consider what death knights are supposed to be... Essentially Corrupted, fallen paladins controlled and empowered with demonic shadow powers. So... You want to take something that is essentially a shadow paladin of doom, and remove the 'I am a bad-arse death knight who will bash your head in' aspect. I don't want my Death knights to become something they're not just because it helps fill an extra role. We are not healers, and we should not be.

That's just my opinion, take it how you like.

You are one of those people that just baffle me; you act like Blizzard came to your house and shot your mother, wife and child all at the same time.

They had to give Paladins three specs. Period. You can't really do two different Paladin DPS specs (and if they did, one of them almost certainly would've been a caster, because you can't make two melee classes out of Paladins and have them both be DPS - one would have to be tank and one melee; and they could easily cover a different weapon type with the Ret tree) and a tank for this class/theme - paladins didn't stop "bashing evil's head" just because ONE of THREE roles they can play is healer. So if they DID do a third spec that wasn't a healer, it wasn't going to be some shield+one-hander using DPS and if it were some kind of holy-magic caster, that wouldn't fit your little definition of what they "should" be.

Also, how the hell has Blizzard "reduced" paladins to dedicated healers? If anything, they are probably most iconic as tanks right now and rightfully so - they protect others and do righteous damage. More importantly though, adding a role to a class doesn't, in any way, "reduce" it - it just gives another choice to the player.

I just don't understand people like you - you literally act offended because a class in the game can do more than one thing or something you don't want it to.

Do you think Rogue players should send out a call to arms and go all peasant rebellion on Blizzard HQ if one day Rogues could tank? No. Because if Rogues could tank, it'd be a fourth spec most likely and it wouldn't just automatically remove their other role in the game as backstabbing sneaks and assassins.

I would not at all mind a DK healing tree or spell caster tree - it gives us something new to do and opens up other possibilities for gameplay - take a look at Rift; it may not be the best game around, but it's got some VERY innovative class roles and specs - there are rogue tanks, melee/caster hybrids (not like our DK or Enh shaman necessarily) and even a bloody healer who uses his own health to heal others.

Concepts evolve man, stop trying to blow it out of proportion.

With all that said, I would have loved to have seen the holy paladin play more like the Warrior Priest from Warhammer Age of Reckoning; a "battle healer" if you will who has to do melee combat to gather up his resources to lay down heals - that's more like what some folks see a holy paladin doing I think.

I would, the fact they they're adding in tri-spec makes me wish we could heal.

Something I would add would be necrotic plague that functions like a backwards renewing mist, so it would start at one, then bounce when it expires to a two stack, then again to a three stack. Or you could throw it out there like rejuv and it would have the potential to bounce and stack up.

You are one of those people that just baffle me; you act like Blizzard came to your house and shot your mother, wife and child all at the same time.

Uncalled for, but whatever.

Originally Posted by Olrox

They had to give Paladins three specs. Period. You can't really do two different Paladin DPS specs (and if they did, one of them almost certainly would've been a caster, because you can't make two melee classes out of Paladins and have them both be DPS - one would have to be tank and one melee; and they could easily cover a different weapon type with the Ret tree) and a tank for this class/theme - paladins didn't stop "bashing evil's head" just because ONE of THREE roles they can play is healer. So if they DID do a third spec that wasn't a healer, it wasn't going to be some shield+one-hander using DPS and if it were some kind of holy-magic caster, that wouldn't fit your little definition of what they "should" be.

Last time I checked, DK's completely violate exactly what you just said. They are a class with a tank spec, and 2 melee dps specs. There is nothing anywhere making anyone believe you couldn't have 2 melee dps specs as a paladin, or heck - even 2 tank specs that work differently. Historically according to every piece of lore that is not world of warcraft - paladins are holy warriors, not dedicated healers. It's just something that doesn't make sense to anyone who remotely cares about class and lore defintion.

The same holds true for Death knights; The lore that blizzard has created does not justify creating a spec for Death Knights to become primary healers, or spellcasters. On that note, I do fully support ideas like making dancing rune weapon slightly different to allow someone to be at range, or some variation for unholy that is more caster-ish. Making them full-blown healers or casters however simply does not make sense.

Originally Posted by Olrox

Also, how the hell has Blizzard "reduced" paladins to dedicated healers? If anything, they are probably most iconic as tanks right now and rightfully so - they protect others and do righteous damage. More importantly though, adding a role to a class doesn't, in any way, "reduce" it - it just gives another choice to the player.

How would you like it, if someone made a batman movie where bruce wayne started acting like the Penguin, never really confronting people but always being a pain in the butt... Or what if 'The Rock' or Triple H started wrestling like Rick flair or The Miz instead of being the Brahma bull or The Game. Paladins are iconic in culture and lore. Changing them from who and what they are is insulting to the people who admire them.

Take special note however - The Penguin is awesome. Rick Flair is awesome; The Miz is AWESOME! (had to). But they are their own people, not what

Originally Posted by Olrox

I just don't understand people like you - you literally act offended because a class in the game can do more than one thing or something you don't want it to.

Uncalled for again, but whatever.

Originally Posted by Olrox

Do you think Rogue players should send out a call to arms and go all peasant rebellion on Blizzard HQ if one day Rogues could tank? No. Because if Rogues could tank, it'd be a fourth spec most likely and it wouldn't just automatically remove their other role in the game as backstabbing sneaks and assassins.

I would not at all mind a DK healing tree or spell caster tree - it gives us something new to do and opens up other possibilities for gameplay - take a look at Rift; it may not be the best game around, but it's got some VERY innovative class roles and specs - there are rogue tanks, melee/caster hybrids (not like our DK or Enh shaman necessarily) and even a bloody healer who uses his own health to heal others.

Concepts evolve man, stop trying to blow it out of proportion.

Rogues shouldn't be able to tank. Giving rogues a slightly stronger ability to temporarily tank would certainly be plausible (evasion tank since the previous tank died) - but anything more than about 15 seconds is a bit silly to me.

I don't think DK's should have a healer or spell-caster tree. As I stated before, I can certainly see some changes that allow for a more caster-ish style. Perhaps something along the idea of a sword-mage. But I still don't see a healer concept as being viable

Yes - concepts evolve. That's also the reason we have people like the red shirt guy. They point out inconsistencies and issues that need to be resolved.

Originally Posted by Olrox

With all that said, I would have loved to have seen the holy paladin play more like the Warrior Priest from Warhammer Age of Reckoning; a "battle healer" if you will who has to do melee combat to gather up his resources to lay down heals - that's more like what some folks see a holy paladin doing I think.

Warrior-Priest, not Paladin. And honestly, a battle-healer would be acceptable for a paladin - provided it was just one of their specs. It's the full-blown stuff that contradicts lore and historic archetypes that bothers me.

---------- Post added 2013-04-27 at 12:14 AM ----------

Originally Posted by IRunSoFarAway

I would, the fact they they're adding in tri-spec makes me wish we could heal.

Last time I checked, tri-spec was still just a rumor that Ghostcrawler squashed - essentially stating they're testing the idea, but not doing it yet (if at all).

Last time I checked, tri-spec was still just a rumor that Ghostcrawler squashed - essentially stating they're testing the idea, but not doing it yet (if at all).

I'm pretty sure it just has something to do with new tech they want to test to see if they can even achieve it technically speaking. If that is the case though I'm sure my 4th spec idea would have something to do with it.

I've thought for a long time that DKs could have a healing spec, if 4th specs were to happen. They have mastery over death; it stands to reason that they should be able to manipulate its attempts to take their friends. Glad to see I'm not the only one who has mused on this craziness.

But they would have to use mana. It's necessary to balance them with the other healers. Without a mana bar, you have a healer that is never OOM, which is OP. Beyond that, it either fails at short but heavy healing bursts, or can heal everything indefinitely. So, just like monks, a DK healer (I like necrolyte) has to get a new button on the stance bar that converts his regular power source into mana.